(page 2 of 32 SteemWhitePaper.pdf)
The users that take time to evaluate and vote on content are playing an important role in distributing the currency to the users who are adding the most value. The blockchain rewards both of these activities relative to their value based on the collective wisdom of the crowd collected through the stake-weighted voting system.
Wow, that's awesome! So what mechanics are in place to stop bad content from getting upvoted? Oh wait, there aren't any.
Proof-of-brain is a great idea. It's pushing Steemit along for now, but sooner or later users are going to become disillusioned that the entire system of proof-of-brain is based on investors using an honor system. We're just supposed to trust anyone who's invested in the Steem blockchain to allocate rewards fairly? How did such a good idea become so laughable so quickly? Just check out user rewardpoolrape.
I've written up a long post about Steemit as a virtual government. It's a declaration of independence of sorts, but I don't even want to post it because I feel like it will get very little exposure. I need to find a whale to support me. That's what I'll be working on tomorrow. Got the day off. Hopefully I make some progress.